What are the most important qualities in a well written villain?
Being relatable but not to the point of considering said villain as part of your own kin, since it would defeat the purpose of him being the villain of the story in the first place. As in his ideals are supportable, logical and realizable, but his means to bring fruition to his plan are questionable which bring yourself into conflict as in whether or not should the villain have your support. It is even better if the protagonist of the story is put in a similar situation, written as if he was trying to find a solution to the dilemma of his own rather than being a portmanteau for the writer opinions. Not that the writer shouldn't write according to his own opinions, but rather that he shouldn't make the characters of his story scarecrows of their presented ideals only to support his own viewpoint on the subject(most of the time using the MC as some kind of Mary sue/avatar of his ideals).
But anyway, I think the question you should have asked was what are the most important qualities of a well written story, since the villain doesn't make the entire story of his own. If he does, however, then he would be the protagonist, not the villain itself.
>>77345216
Making a guess here, but you're a Magneto fan, aren't you?
MUSTACHE TWIRLING
DOG KICKING
BLEEDING EDGE
>>77345251
Someone needs to do a nineties-style reboot of Snidley Whiplash.
Fleshed-out or intimidating enough if your goal is to have a horror villain. Preferably both, though.
>>77345216
>relatable
>As in his ideals are supportable
No, that's not necessarily important to writing a good villain at all. You can write an inhuman monster and still make them believable and well-written, see Patrick Bateman (yeah, Ellis is a hack. Bateman is still his finest creation though), he's inhuman and petty but you get to see what makes him tick, why he does things he does and how he thinks and rationalizes his actions.
Hell, some villains are better off without people just knowing their motivation and working on pure terror factor (Mike Myers in first Halloween, for instance.).
So, it all boils to the kind of story you want to write.
>>77345299
>yeah, Ellis is a hack. Bateman is still his finest creation though
No, Sean Bateman is
>>77345299
The stroke of genius to Bateman is that he's the most boring person in the story. There's absolutely nothing interesting about him. He has no real opinions or thoughts, he hasn't earned anything, and he does nothing of value. He only likes things because he's been told that he should, and he only recycles the same pap to defend those things that everyone else does.
Like, listen to how he talks about The Greatest Love of All and Huey Lewis and the News. He sounds like he's reading record company copy. Look at how he dresses, and pay attention to what he does when he's at the office. No one even knows who he is; he's constantly confused for someone else.
Being a psychopath is the only thing that's interesting about him, and he isn't even actually a psychopath. He just pretends to be.
>>77345312
James Van Der Beek is not a 'finest' anything.
>>77345081
Being able to be written in any story, Dooom is the evil mad scientist, evil wizard and misunderstood tyrant all at the same time. You can write him pure evil or antihero and it works.
>>77345352
>can write him pure evil
>it works
Fuck off, Waid. No, it doesn't work and it's the weakest part of an otherwise good run.
>>77345364
True I prefer my misunderstood Victor like in the Books of Doom.
>>77345350
He was amazing in that movie, and much more of a vile person than Patrick
>>77345386
Right. Because he was a real person, instead of a facsimile.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrvImC0YfRs
>>77345410
That's why I like Sean more than Patrick, he really has no excuse for what he is and what he does.
>>77345423
Yep. And him just simply telling Paul that he'll never 'know' him is far more brutal and eviscerating than any of the deluded fantasies that Patrick could ever think of. Sean's all that much worse because we've all been Sean at some point or another, so in love with ourselves and our stories that we blindly swing around and strike other people. Not out of sheer malice, but because we just don't give a fuck. That coldness is far more chilling than Patrick's hollowness, because we can relate to it so much.
>>77345444
Exactly, and then we get to American Psycho and his chapter of that book, and we see that he's just gotten worse. He looked at himself and decided to double down.
>we'll never get the already filmed spin-off Victor's trip to Europe
>we'll never get the planned sequel adapatation of Glamorama
>>77345444
Speak for yourself.
I don't find anything chilling in telling people to fuck off.
>>77345081
Make your protagonist dependent on the villain to the point that the protagonist would be uninteresting with out the villain.
>>77345498
That'd become monotonous and cliche pretty soon, wouldn't it?
>>77345328
Okay, fine. Bad example.
Regardless, the point is that "the well-written villain should necessary be relatable and with supportable ideals" is a very restricting and not always realistic mindset.
>>77345216
>the villain doesn't make the entire story of his own. If he does, however, then he would be the protagonist, not the villain itself.
I disagree. The hero may be the one the story follows, but most of the time heroes are purely reactive and much more boring than the villains. The villain is the one who has hopes and dreams, turns them into concrete goals, and takes action. Then the hero stops the villain from doing the thing and restores the sacred status quo.
>>77345501
I can't think of any current stories that carry this besides doom.
>>77345081
Style counts for quite a bit, I'd say. And I'm not just talking about their looks. This guy right here? Low tier super power, but he's got a pretty cool manner to him. If only he was actually more relevant.
>>77345081
one that fits the narrative
That he's engaging in a disagreeable fashion. Yes that's a very blanket answer and its to a blanket question. The motives, back story, reason, don't matter too much because you can have the deepest lore for a villain but all the matters is if he grabs your attention and you as a reader find yourself at odds with him than boom you have your heel.
My favorite villian is Darksied btw.
>>77345526
No no. I was agreeing with you, man. I'm just saying that sometimes, you need to SPRINT away from being relatable and supportable to be a truly great, memorable villain.
Conviction
>>77345081
>Providing a conflict that challenges the hero's weaknesses
>Driven by a similar motive to the hero, or fails due to having a stronger version of the hero's fatal flaw
>Optional but usually helps: Acts like a three-dimensional human being with their own personal issues and inner conflict. Does not mean they have to be sympathetic (See: Frollo)
A good villain ultimately believes that they're doing the right thing. They may acknowledge that they're going about it in a fucked up way, but in their mind, it's necessary for their goals.
Villains who do evil shit for the sake of doing evil shit, IE the Joker, are boring and give the reader nothing to actually think about. Their inevitable demise offers no actual ramifications other than "the good guy wins". We know the good guy is going to fucking win, it's a comic book. What matters is what the good guy winning means to the world around him.
>>77345851
You're wrong though. A villain like the Kingpin is someone who doesn't think what they're doing is right, they just don't give a shit about morality. However someone like the Kingpin or Lex Luthor (Though Luthor is often written to think he is right) are thought provoking, intelligent villains.
>inb4 NetflixDDfags claim that Kingpin has a goal he thinks is the right thing
>>77345851
I wouldn't say that necessarily. Not to go for Jojo posting, but people love Dio, and his schtick is essentially just being a petty cunt.
You can have an evil for the sake of evil villain, but it just has to fit the sort of tone you're going for. The villain should reflect the story you're trying to tell.
>>77345851
>give the reader nothing to actually think about
Neither do "he thinks he was right" villains and they are boring too unless there's good execution.
Same with any kind of villain.
Intelligence, Nihilism, and a Wicked sense of humor.
>>77345907
>inb4 NetflixDDfags claim that Kingpin has a goal he thinks is the right thing
He did. The season finale was him realizing he wasn't a good person.
>>77345943
Yes, Netflix Kingpin does, but almost every other version of the character is just a cunt who wants money.
>>77345907
> (Though Luthor is often written to think he is right)
Understatement of the century. If there is one thing that defines Luthor, it's that he thinks he knows best for everyone around him.
>>77345851
Negan is a crap villain because Kikeman is a fucking hack who managed to be super lucky with timing his comic around the time the zombie fiction renaissance was starting.
In superhero stuff? How well they play off of the hero. In general? Fucked if I know.
>>77345907
Goddammit lost my original text, anyway the short of it is Kingpin technically does think what he's doing is right in a relative sense BECAUSE of morality.
In his little chat with Peter in prison he explains people like them most likely don't think they're good, most of them accept they're scum but all of them know in the real world there's the choice of being the criminal or the victim, and they would rather have that choice to have their actions define them than be the chump who lets other people's decisions affect them.
It allows for just as much thought as any other villain with a view of things because you can't say he's wrong, he's not objectively right but even Peter has to stoop down to his level while propping up on a soapbox to further the fact without power, well super power since Fisk sort of has a powerful physique, you are at the mercy and whim of others except Peter has the most power there so regardless of his chump mentality he is not the physical chump by any margin and they can do what they want but it's best not to expressly fuck with him or they'll learn how unfair life can be when extremes go into the impossible territory.
So that anon isn't wrong.
>>77345081
A huge nose.
Why does /co/ keep trying to reduce good characterization into formulas? Didn't you learn anything from the failed trend of deconstructionism in literary criticism some 30 or 40 years ago? The ultimate conclusion was you can't. At all.
>>77345911
>but people love Dio, and his schtick is essentially just being a petty cunt.
Actually Dio is like how I defined Fisk above, you might call it a stretch of things but again Dio and the writer themselves acknowledge it.
Dio tells JoJo real life outside the mansion walls of his ideal prince fantasy is unrelentingly cruel. If you want to talk about anyone who's real evil Dio's father was a complete shit without reason, Dio had to poison him to escape his influence and take advantage of anything he could to survive after that.
Again, he's not good at all. His actions are amusingly simple in their villainy with no other intention in of themselves other than subjugating someone to what will put them or others beneath him even if it lessens Dio as a result, but his overall motivations for this are not simple and almost complex because like with Fisk Dio recognizes he lives in a world where unfair does not even begin to define the gap between him and those like Jonathan or vampires or stone pillar gods and so on who have been handed in some way or another a fortune, a favor, a form of advantage of others while the weak have no other choice but to live under the threat of these things or viciously climb, over others if necessary, to a place of safety.
Look at how Dio got where he has, manipulating and killing his father gave him the Joestar advantage, manipulating and killing the Joestars gave him their inheritance, manpulating Jonathan's research which he would never have discovered himself gave him further power through vampirism, killing Jonathan gave him stand power which he would never have gotten himself. Life is constantly teaching him a lesson that he can only win one way against those in higher places than him.
>>77346463
Well, if you're stretching it that far, it's not at all different from "being evil for the sake of evil" motivation, so it contradicts what that anon said.
Many sociopathic serial killers view themselves as superior and dehumanize everyone else, others are "chumps" and "toys to play with" in their eyes. Hell, some even realize they're monsters, it just doesn't bother them.
>>77346587
I think you're doing a bit too much work on the story's behalf to make Dio seem complex. You could argue the same thing about any out and out evil antagonist, from the queen in Snow White to Jafar. If we define pure selfishness as "thinking they're doing the right thing" than almost every villain would fit that mark to some degree or another.
These are all characters that work perfectly within their own stories. It's not a question of depth but context and tone.
Having a plan that doesn't revolve around the plot. Most villains plans are incomplete because it really isn't thought through since they're going to get stopped, anyways. Also, I'm tired of villains that are plain evil and I'm really tired of villains that I can emphasis too much with. How about a flawed villain? One whose plans aren't perfect up until the very last stage in which he allows the MC to win.
>>77346821
I mean a lot of that describes Hans Gruber, and he's still one of the best movie villains of all time.
Execution still matters.
Shit Tier:
>Villain has no real connction to the hero and is barely even a character
Mid Tier:
>Villain has thematic connection to the hero but is a simple character with simple motives
High Tier:
>Villain has a thematic connection to the hero and is a flesh-out human being with their own character arc
>God Tier:>There is no villain.
>>77345364
You absolutely can write Doom as evil as fuck, but he definitely can't kill kids/innocents without a "good" reason
>>77345081
Depends on the kind of villain, I guess the most important one is you, the reader, being able to see how they ended up where they were. And I don't mean make every villain good deep down but rather have their motives make sense, such as Dio Brando who was born into a house of poverty and abuse which fueled his greed and desire for power to distance himself as much as he could from his pathetic origins.
>>77346860
*>God Tierhero is actually the villian
>>77345081
The kind that the actor can have fun portraying but also be deadly competent.
>>77346860
AW SHIT NIGGAH
YOU'RE RIGHT
>>77346957
>actor
>>>/tv/
>>77345081
Villains that don't seem pulled out of a saturday morning cartoon from the 80s.
>>77347006
>this troll shit again
Fuck off.
>>77346463
>Goddammit lost my original text
install Lazarus add-on.
>>77346916gutalala sudalala
I think the most important part of a villian that most writers for get is that they don't need a sad backstory to make them likable or relateable with different philosophies to fit their world view you just need to make them interesting.
>>77346746
>"being evil for the sake of evil"
It's not really for the sake of evil, realize what that statement means taken literally.
Wilson rarely ever does anything for the sake of evil.
I'm not contesting whether Kingpin or his actions are villainous, I'm clarifying saying he's just a brainless villain when great lengths have been taken to elaborate on the difference between him and all the other dumb brutes is kind of a disservice to the writers and character.
Same with Barracuda, is he a cunt? Yes. Does he enjoy hurting anyone if he can? Yes. Is he himself evil for the sake of evil? No. Like with Wilson he believes he's in the right because of how life is.
If you want someone without any reasoning behind any of what they are use Carnage.
>>77346765
Am I? Do those events I cited not occur? Does Dio not specifically speak on these things? Are we not shown explicitly what brought Dio where he is? Am I to believe Araki just accidentally stumbled across the words and illustrations?
Again I stress I'm not saying Dio or Fisk are good people at heart or some table flipping psychology nonsense like that, I'm saying they see themselves as an answer to life's tough questions.
>>77345081
Being genuinely threatening is really the only one that matters.
A villain needs to have an understandable reason for their villainy. You don't have to agree with it, but it should at least make SOME bizarre form of sense.
>>77345081
Bald, rock like skin, cold color pigmented skin.
>>77347101
>If you want someone without any reasoning behind any of what they are use Carnage.
Hell, no. Carnage has his own reasoning too and it's about as thoughtful as Kingpin's or Barracuda's. Which is to say not at all, but it serves its purpose.
Read It's a Wonderful Life and Maximum Carnage. His reasoning is stupid but it's not non-existent.
A villain should be the protagonist of their own story. They can think they're right, or know they're wrong, but if they have deeper motivation that drives them beyond "I want money and bitches because I want them" they become more compelling
That can be their goal, but like Penguin, their own heroes journey needsto be satisfying
>>77346765
I believe Dio has his layers but not due to his villainy. I'll summon another Anon who likes to deal with such things. Hey Action Hero A!
>>77347179
>Carnage has his own reasoning too and it's about as thoughtful as Kingpin's or Barracuda's.
>Which is to say not at all
I'm sorry Anon-sama but this is the line I will not cross for any measure of debate.
As a garbage fiction writer myself I cannot dilute and collectively lump up the work put in by those who put in work.
Unknown as I may go with my hot opinions, the very least I can do is recognize real.
I like when villains are forgiving to their underlings, like "hey yeah you got fucked up pretty bad, but it'd be retarded to not make use of you in the future, you clearly still have power"
>>77345966
But he also is prone to flying off the handle and acting completely out of spite/rage, even if it's not towards his original goal.
>>77346463
Nope, Kingpin in no way cares about morals, he cares about himself, power, and after he gets married, his wife.
It has nothing do do with some grand cause, it's not on a spectrum of doing "what's right" it's an entirely different type of motivation.
>>77347091
>just need to make them interesting
How insightful. I only need to make this guy interesting to make him interesting. Idiot.
>>77347442
Oh, come on, no need for sarcastic tone.
It's almost the exact same nihilistic outlook on life that would be stupid in real life to most people, but works for real criminals or villains. You'd be surprised how stupid otherwise very intelligent real-life mobsters sound when they say things like that.
It's the same "life's been treating me harsh, best be a bastard to bite it back" motivation only instead of "weak and strong" justification for it Carnage uses "life is meaningless".
>>77347006
>Shit tier
>people who think character execution is as rigid as a simple chart
>>77345549
name?
>>77347725
Titan from Robert Kirkman's Invincible. He's honestly not all that, he just dupes Mark, Invincible, into believing he should help him take over a criminal empire. Problem is Mark is easily duped by many people so it's an achievement that loses its spectacle.
>>77345911
>>77346587
I think a thing that works to make a good villain is that he should have fun. Like enjoy the shit out of the things (good or bad) that he does
>>77346860
>omg so clever and witty! no villain at all!
You pretemptious fucks are hilarious
>>77347769
He's a fancy guy.Why all the crime lords have more higher tastes in clothing than the MC?
>>77347879
People with a hunger for things often have a taste for things.
>>77347063
You're Katsumata, aren't you?
>>77347864
>What are slice of life stories
>>77347864
>All conflicts are man vs. man
>>77345081
I think they have to somehow have to symbolically represent the greatest threat in the protaganist's life. If there are multiple villains, they should represent individual negative aspects of the protaganist or different possible outcomes for the protaganist.
Darth Vader is what Luke would become should he choose the path to the Dark Side.
Lex Luthor and Darkseid are what would become of Superman if he only used his power for his own needs.
I could go on but I don't really feel like it.
>>77348632
>Darkseid
He's what Orion would become if he gave into his anger.
Idiot
>>77348798
Why not both
>>77348814
Because's he's the arch-villain to only one
>>77348837
He's fought Superman way more times than he's fought Orion.
>>77348871
Because of standard DC hackwork. Spitting on the King
>>77345352
What about FantFourstic?
>>77348632
ew, this reeks of shit writing. Constructing intentionally restrictive thematic concepts that a child could discern.
Please don't write.
Any that fit the overall narrative. Relation to the heroes is a big one.I prefer most people in a story to be different shades of grey. Hero-Villain stuff is too boring.
>>77348931
>Constructing intentionally restrictive thematic concepts
No I didn't.
These are my opinions on what makes a good antagonist.
Sorry if I triggered you.
>>77345081
There is no criteria for a great villain. But he should be related to the villain imo. A power hungry Darkseid is still a better villain than a revenge driven Victor Fries or most morally gray villains who seem to be the norm these days.
>>77345081
the ability to not be sung to death
>>77345267
Way ahead of you.
>>77345379
I always loved the idea that Latveria is an amazing place to live. Everyone loves him.
>>77345081
Personally I feel a good comicbook villain needs to have at least partially-accomplishable objectives to work within serialized storytelling.
I like Dr Doom, I really do. But he is never going to take over the planet and keep control for any amount of time, we know when he does that its only a temporary blip until we go right back to the status quo.
This is why I really liked the classical Magneto. His goal was to incite a race war with mundane humans, and every time he got into a battle with the X-Men, win or lose, the collateral damage brought the war one step closer to reality. Every time rotten vegetables were thrown at the X-Men after they'd just saved the world, Magneto was winning.
(but like every decent villain, they eventually are subjected to anti-hero status and ruined)
>>77349281
>needs to have at least partially-accomplishable objectives to work
I agree completely. If the bad guy can't ever win during the course of the work, then he's just pathetic and not really a threat. Sure, the heroes need to win in the end (and hopefully to have their own victories during the story), but the villain needs to kick their asses a few times to show that he's serious business.
>>77347588
>I only need to make this guy interesting to make him interesting.
exactly
The most important quality in a well written villain is to be a threat to the hero
More Kang. MORE!
>>77345081
The most important one is being credibly able to oppose the protagonist.
>>77345299
ellis is not a hack. the creation of a character like that alone would put a writer well above "hack" level
>>77345216
>Being relatable
>>77348112
Boring.
>>77345081
Jobbing
>>77349000
Yes you did, you tied the villain directly to the hero, that is inherently restrictive.
>>77350564
I'm not writing the fucking laws of storytelling here, motherfucker. It's an opinion.
You might understand a little better if your head wasn't so far up your ass.
>>77347006
>uses a picture of Ocarina of Time Ganondorf
>clearly hasn't played Ocarina of Time
>>77347162
>becoming the Tiger Force makes sense to anyone ever
>>77350564
If the villain isn't tied to the hero, 99.9% of the time you have a shitty villain.
He needs to rape a lot of people.
